Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1887-11-09
q Serial Sturp.
THE NINE OF HEARTS.
BY B. L. FARJEON.
PART THE FIRST.
THE TRIAL OF EDWARD LAYTON.

PART THE FIRST.
THE TRIAL OF EDWARD LAYTON.
CHAPTER VI.
DESCRIPTION OF THE LAST DAYS PROCEED
INGs-EXTRAcTED FROM DAILY PAPER.
ssThe trial of Edward Layton for the
murder of his wife came to singular and
unsatisfactory termination late last night.
That the public interest in the case had
reached an almost unprecedented height
was proved by the large number of per-
sons who were unable to obtain admission
to the court.
@On the previous evening the evidence
for the prosecution had closed, and there
was painful and eager expectancy in the
minds OF all present as 40 the line OF de-,
tense which the prisoner intended to
adopt. This line of defense If indeed it
can be called defense-was as surprising
as it was brief.
ssThe prisoner, addressing the judge and
jury, intimated that it was not his inten-
ton to call witnesses on his behalf. Most
of the witnesses for the prosecution, he
said, had given their evidence fairly, and
if they had committed themselves to mis-
statements and discrepancies, it was more
because they were either misled or mis-
taken-in the case Of one witness, Ida
White, because she was strangely preju-
diced against him-than that they had a
desire to make the case against him even
blacker than it was. 1t had happened be-
fore, and would doubtless happen again,
that man found himself thrust into
such an unhappy position as he himself
stood through no fault Of his own,
and that he was unable to say or
do anything to prove his innocence. Some
times it was with such man a matter OF
honor, sometimes matter Of conscience.
In his own case it sprung from both his
honor and his conscience that his lips were
sealed, and the utmost he could say for
himself was that he was an innocent man,
with so dark an array Of evidence against
him as to almost incontestably prove him
to be guilty. All that he could do was to
declare most solemnly that the accusation
upon which he was being tried was false,
and that he stood before them as un-
stained by crime as they were themselves.
What could be said truly in his favor was
that his character, and to some extent his
blameless life, were refutation of the
charge. Evidence Of character was gen.
orally called in mitigation Of impending
punishment. He did not intend to call
such evidence, because, by so doing, it
would be half admission that he stood
there guilty instead Of an innocent man.
He knew perfectly well how lame and i'm
potent these weak words must sound in
the ears Of those who were sitting in judg-
ment upon him; but this he could not
help. It was but part Of the fatal web in
which he was entangled. That he and
his wife had lived unhappily together was
not to be disputed; but even in this most
serious crisis Of his life he denied the right
arrogated by the legal profession to
rip open a mans private affairs and ex-
pose to the vulgar gaze what he desired
should be hidden from it. The last thing
he would do, even if he had been in ten
times the peril in which he then stood,
was to drag other persons into the case.
and to allow them to be blackened and
vilified as he had been. 4 can scarcely
doubt said the prisoner, what your YER
dict will be. Were in your place
,. should most likely decide as you will de-
eide; but none the less will it be a solemn
fact that, though you are legally right,
you are morally wrong. I must be con-
tent to let the case rest as it has been pre-
sented to you, and to abide the issue,
though it may cost me my life
''Never in criminal court, in the case
of o man arraigned upon so grave q
charge, has there been heard defense so
weak and strange; but it is nevertheless
o fact that the prisoners earnest and, to
all appearance, ingenious manner pro-
duced deep impression upon all who
heard him, and when he ceased speaking
there was, in the murmurs of astonish
ment that followed, an unmistakable note
of sympathy.
"After a slight pause the attorney gen.
eral rose to sum up the case against the
prisoner, and his incisive judicial utter
ances soon dispelled the impression which
the prisoners earnestness had produced
He said that in the circumstances Of the
case his speech would be briefer than it
otherwise would have been. he had
duty to perform and he would perform il,
without, he hoped, any undue severity or
harshness. Unhappiy the evidence was
only too clear against the prisoner, and
unhappily the prisoner had strengthened
the case against himself. This was not
matter of sentiment; it was a matter Of
justice, and justice must be done. With
slight limitations, around which the pris-
oner threw veil of silence, contenting
himself to cast suspicion upon them by
some kind Of mysterious implication
which no person could understand, and
not venturing to give them distinct and
indignant denial-with slight limitations,
then, the prisoner had admitted the truth
fulness of the evidence brought against
him. AS the prisoner had not di-
rectly referred to these doubtful
points in the evidence, he would him
self do so and endeavor to clear away
any latent doubt, if such existed, in
the minds Of the jury. First, with
respect to the ulster. The prisoner did
not deny that he wore this ulster on the
whole Of the day his coachman, John
Moorhouse, was driving him to various
places, and it was only upon his arrival
home at midnight that he endeavored to
shake the coachman's evidence as to
whether, when he entered the carriage,
upon leaving Prevosts restaurant, and
upon his issuing from the carriage when
the coachman drew up at his house, he
still had his ulster on. What his motive
was in endeavoring to shake the coach
impossible to say. He (the learned coun-
seD had most carefully considered the
matter, and the only conclusion he could
arrive at was that the prisoner was anx-
ious to instil doubt into the minds of the
jury, that it was not he who left the res.
taurant at 11:50 and entered his carriage,
and that it was not he who alighted from
the carriage and opened his street door.
But supposing, for instance, that this ar
gument had foundation in fact, was it
not easy for the prisoner to prove what ne
had done with himself between 1l:5O on
the night of the 25th Of March and 7
o'clock on the morning Of the Goth? Surely
some person or persons must have seen him.
and had he produced those persons there
would have been reasonable alibi set up,
which it would be the duty Of every one
engaged in this case seriously to consider.
Indeed, he would 60 50 far as to say that,
admitting such evidence to be brought
forward and established, there could not
be found jury who would convict the
prisoner of the charge brought against
him. 1t would then have been proved
that the prisoner had not seen his wife
from II o'clock on the morning of the 25th
of March until Z o'clock on the morning
of the Goth; and as it was during the night
of those days that the unhappy lady met